The review, however, calls Baptist's work "advocacy" and
"not history" because he only relied on the "testimony of a few
slaves."

In one of the most inflammatory lines, the reviewer claims that
"Baptist has not written an objective history of slavery" because
"almost all the blacks in his book are victims, almost all the
whites villains."

A sarcastic hashtag, #Economistbookreviews, even appeared on
Twitter as part of the backlash, as
Gawker noted.

In an editor's note Friday, The Economist apologized and withdrew
the review, still keeping a cached version in the interest of
transparency. "There has been widespread criticism of this,
and rightly so," it wrote.